The 9th circuit did not rule the magazine ban unconstitutional and even issued a statement along with the ruling that upheld the injunction that they don't agree with the injunction, the reason it was upheld was because they could not prove that the judge who initially ordered the injunction violated any laws or abused his power in any way.

> “determine only whether the district court correctly distilled the applicable rules of law and exercised permissible discretion in applying those rules to the facts at hand"

The 9th circuit did not rule the magazine ban unconstitutional and even issued a statement along with the ruling that upheld the injunction that they don't agree with the injunction, the reason it was upheld was because they could not prove that the judge who initially ordered the injunction violated any laws or abused his power in any way.

&gt; “determine only whether the district court correctly distilled the applicable rules of law and exercised permissible discretion in applying those rules to the facts at hand"

[https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/ninth-circuit-protects-gun-rights-california/](https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/ninth-circuit-protects-gun-rights-california/)

This seems like a positive development from my perspective as this was the "template" for the NJ magazine law creation.

Am i seeing it wrong?

Ninth Circuit California Gun-Law Ruling: Good News for Second Amendment Rights